St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-02-07
WHAT THE RESPONSE i?
Secretary Manning Gives in Writing His
Views of the Fisheries Dispute
With Canada.
He Hesitates, Owing to His Position, to
Express an Opinion on the Retail
alton Bill,
But Suggests Measure Empowering
the President to Defend the Rights
of This Country.
Severe Structures Upon Medieval 7 ar
1f Laws and England's Nom
Intercourse Policy.

WASHINGTON. Feb. 6.-Secretary Man
ming has sent to Perry Belmont, chair
man of the house committee on foreign
affairs, long and carefully prepared reply
to the request Of that committee for his
views with regard to the house and senate
retaliation bill, and for any suggestions
that he may desire to make with reference
thereto. The secretary divides the subject
to be considered into two parts, first,
the fishing rights of the United States,
and. second. the commercial rights of
American vessels in Canadian ports. The
rights of the former class, he says, are de-
, fined by the treaties of 1878 and 1918, and
we do not ask either of Great Britain or
Canada any other lights or liberties of TAX
ing. drying, or curing fish than those Stip-
ulated in such treaties. In respect to
commercial privileges for our fishing YES
sells in Canadian ports, the situation
is otherwise. Up to President Jackson's
proclamation of Oct. 5, 1880, this govern
ment had no commercial privileges for its
vessels in Canadian ports. We had such
privileges as colonists; we lost them as col
onsts; we reganed them in 1880 by an ar
rangement of legislation finally concerted
with Great Britain, which was the result of
an international understanding that was in
effect although not technically a treaty."
The secretary then reviews at some length
the
HISTORY OF THE RELATIONS
between the governments of the United
States and Great Britain in this respect
from 1888 to 1880. Il am not aware" the
secretary says, ''of any treaty except the
fishing clauses of the treaty of 1918 and the
treaty of 1871, or of any rule of interna-
tional law binding on the United States,
which now conStrans Great Britain to
commercial intercourse with ourselves in
Canadian ports, and from the point of view
of this department, Great Britain can, of
she deems it for her interest or necessary
for her safely. retreat from the understand
ing and agreements of 1880. Whether
such retreat is to be deemed Just and
friendly act would depend upon its motives
and environment. To be sure the arrange
ment OF 1880 was not in technical sense a
treaty from which neither party can with
draw without the consent of the other alni-
ca5ly obtained, but it was to be rule for
two powerful states. 1t represented the
will and opinions of each. 1t was delib-
crate international act. It was q bargain
in which one government bought privi-
lege at the price of an equivalent given to
the other. 1t was a contract So'elnniZed and
attested by the law-making instead of the
treaty-making power of the two nations.
What we are now confronted By is the
royal assent, given by the queen in council
on Nov. 26, 1886, to the Canadian act ell
titled 'an act further to amend the act re-
specting fisheries by foreign vessels
1t begins by reciting that it is
intended for the more effectual protection
it1-r- -hnr1 E-l, =
intrusion by foreigners. The offensive sig
niticance of that law is in the fact that by
what assume is law. the statute estab-
fishing the Canadian union. the governor
general must, according to his discretion,
but subject to
THE QUEENS INSTRUCTIONS,
either declare that he assents in the queens
name to bill passed by the houses of the
Canadian parliament, or that he withholds
the queens assent. or that he reserves the
bill for the signifcation of the queens
pleasure. The last-named alternative
phrase was adopted in dealing with the
Canadian law of 1856. which peremptorily
closes Canadian ports to our fishing vessels
seeking to trade. 1t empowers any of the
therein designated officials to bring to and
search any American vessels being within
any Canadian harbOr or lowering in British
waters. This is revival In Canada of the
theory of the ancient British lowering act,
long ago repealed in the mother country.
II these searches are prescribed and author
lied to be of a fishing vessel lettering in
prohibited place and fairly suspected of
preparing there to fish in violation of law,
such search, if fairly and reasonably made.
may be tolerated. Our. own customs lay
preScribes and authorizes similar search
Of fnrpiUn yQcSpls four
our coast. But the Canadian act, thus
having the royal approval. was intended
as has been openly avowed, to forfeit any
American fishing vessel which is found
having entered Canadian waters or the port
of Halifax to buy ice. bait and other arti-
cles, or for any purpose other than shelter.
repairs, wood or water. The plea is that
the treaty of 1918 permits and stipulates for
such legislation. England may Judge for
herself of the nature and extent of the
Comfy AND COURTESY
she will show to US. In the present case
we do not propose retaliation; we simply
respond. We, too, suspend comfy and
hospitality, and now comes the question:
What shall be the character and limitations
of the response? Shall we only exclude
Canadian fishermen and all Canadian YES
sells, or both of them and all merchandise
coming from Canada by any sort OF vehicle,
including the vehicle. Under what condi-
tioils can negotiations go on with the least
injury to ourselves, our dignity and self re-
spect? ! cannot believe that the govern
ment at London Will persist III its present
course unless inspired, for some occult rea-
son, by a purpose to break friendly rela-
tions with ourselves, or unless under the
will and at the mercy of its colony" The
than onnS6nrc fba
| whether or not article 80, of
the Alabama treaty, was left
standing by the act of congress of June
2S. 1888, and the presidents proclamation
Hereunder. In considering the bills SUBJ
mitted to him, Secretary Manning says that
he is extremely reluctant to discuss any bill
which. after debate, has been adopted in
the senate by vote almost unanimous. and
that he does SO solely from the point of
view of the head of the treasury depart
ment, to which VIII be committed the exc
| cution of a proclamation issued by the
president under the proposed measure if it
shall become law. If" he says, 1.-The
senate bill shall become law, and the
president shall issue his proclamation there
under besides, putting an end to the transit
traffic, its effect will be to exclude from i'm
! portation
CANADIAN FREE GOODS,
such as certain kinds of fish, lumber, ami
mails, etc., to the amount of about 50. $780,
600 annually, and also of reducing the
revenue by preventing the importation of
Canadian dutiable products, such as lum-
ber. breadstuffs. fish, etc.. in annual value
! say $4,000, 600, to the extent of about
$4,000, 900, which will be the probable
duties collectable on such goods during the
present fiscal year, if the present system of
| intercourse shall cnntinna Ho raaana-